This is one of the most incredible documents I have read. It is an attempt by Minister Jamie Briggs to justify what he is doing to Norfolk Island from a human rights point of view.
It is so twisted, I wonder how he can lie straight in bed at night.
I am sure any backyard lawyer could find multiple holes in it.
Statement
of Compatibility with Human Rights
Prepared
in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary
Scrutiny) Act 2011
Norfolk
Island Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 and related Bills
These
Bills are compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or
declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the
Human
Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.
Overview
of the Bill
The
principal objective of this package of bills is to provide the
necessary framework for the sustainable economic and social
development of the Norfolk Island Community. This is achieved through
two principal reforms. The first is amendment of the Norfolk
Island Act 1979 to
reform governance and legal arrangements of Norfolk Island. This will
implement in large measure the Government‘s response to the ―Same
Country: Different World‖ report of the Joint Standing Committee on
the National Capital and External Territories.
The
second principal object of this package of Bills is the extension of
many mainland social security, immigration, and health arrangements
to Norfolk Island. This will implement in large part the election
commitment of the Australian Government made in September 2013 and is
consistent with the general principle that as Norfolk Island is part
of Australia, those Australians who live there should have the same
obligations and receive the same access to benefits as other
Australians.
A
more detailed description of this package of Bills is set out in the
Outline to the Explanatory Memorandum.
Human
rights implications
The
following human rights are engaged by this package of Bills:
-
The right to self-determination
-
The rights of minorities
-
The right to take part in public affairs and elections
-
The right to freedom of movement
-
The right to social security
-
The right to health
-
The right to an adequate standard of living, and
-
The right to work
The
right to self-determination
Article
1 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
and Art 1 of the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
provide that all peoples have the right of self-determination and
that by virtue of that right they can freely determine their
political status and freely pursue their economic, social and
cultural development.
Some
parts of the Norfolk-Pitcairn population of Norfolk Island identify
as a people with rights to self-determination. The proposed
governance reforms, which effectively remove Norfolk Island‘s
self-governing status, may be viewed by this group as being
inconsistent with the right to self-determination.
Even
if it is accepted that the Norfolk-Pitcairn population are a people
with a right to self-determination, self-determination is widely
understood to be exercisable in a manner that preserves the
territorial integrity, political unity and sovereignty of a country,
such as Australia. Self-government of Norfolk Island is thus not a
prerequisite to exercising any right of self-determination.
The
right to self-determination does, however, require that peoples be
consulted about decision that impact on them and have the opportunity
to participate in the making of such decisions, including through the
processes of democratic government. It also includes a right to
preserve group identity and culture.
The
proposed governance reforms are the result of an extensive
consultation process, including as led by the Administrator of
Norfolk Island in response to the report of the Joint Standing
Committee on the National Capital and External Territories ―Same
Country: Different World‖. The Norfolk Island community was
consulted over several months through public forums, facilitated
discussions, meetings with community leaders and groups, and the
option to provide views directly over the internet or by letter.
Hundreds of community members participated in one or more of the
consultation processes. These consultations found significant support
for change within the Norfolk Island community.
The
primary purpose of the proposed governance reforms and the extension
of mainland social security, immigration and health arrangements to
Norfolk Island is to provide for the sustainable economic and social
development of Norfolk Island, which are important aspects of the
right to self-determination. The maintenance of the Norfolk-Pitcairn
culture relies to some extent on the opportunities for members of
that community to remain living on Norfolk Island. The proposed
reforms will facilitate this by providing for sustainable economic
development on Norfolk Island.
During
the interim transition time from the current governance arrangements
to the new governance arrangements, the population of Norfolk Island,
including the Norfolk-Pitcairn population, will be able to
participate in the making of decisions that affect them through the
Advisory Council.
Under
the new governance arrangements, the Australian citizens of Norfolk
Island will be able to directly elect a Norfolk Island Regional
Council, which will be responsible for local level and municipal
government functions on Norfolk Island, such as the provision and
maintenance of roads, power, water and sewerage, waste disposal and
treatment, land use planning, management of local natural areas,
historic and cultural places and public recreation facilities. The
population of Norfolk Island will also remain eligible to vote in
Commonwealth elections.
In
light of the above factors, the Norfolk Island Legislation Amendment
Bill 2015 and related Bills are consistent with any applicable right
to self-determination.
Rights
of minorities
Article
27 of the ICCPR is an individual right which overlaps to some extent
with the collective right of peoples to self-determination. Article
27 provides that:
‗In
those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities
exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the
right, in community with other members of their group, to enjoy their
own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use
their own language‘. 11
The
Norfolk-Pitcairn population of Norfolk Island may constitute a
minority under Art 27. The proposed governance reforms and the
extension of mainland social security, immigration and health
arrangements to Norfolk Island do not limit in any way the existing
rights of the Norfolk-Pitcairn population to enjoy their own culture
or use their own language. As noted above, the primary purpose of
these reforms is to provide for the sustainable economic and social
development of Norfolk Island, which will in turn facilitate the
maintenance of the Norfolk-Pitcairn culture.
The
right to take part in public affairs and elections
Article
25 of the ICCPR sets out another right which is related to, but
distinct from the right to self-determination. Article 25 relevantly
provides that:
‗Every
citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the
distinctions mentioned in Article 2 (i.e. race, colour, sex,
language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status) and without unreasonable
restriction:
(a)
To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through
freely chosen representatives;
(b)
To vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall
be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret
ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors;
(c)
…‘
(see
also Art 5(c) of the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD),
Arts 7 and 8 of the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW),
and Art 29 of the Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
The
Bill engages this right through the abolition of the Norfolk Island
Legislative Assembly. However, the Human Rights Committee has
recognised that the right to take part in public affairs and
elections can be met by different models of governance, so long as
these are democratic and based on the consent of the people (see
General Comment No 25 at para 1).
The
final governance arrangements proposed for Norfolk Island, and of
which the amendments made by this Bill are a significant component,
will include the establishment of a Norfolk Island Regional Council,
responsible for local and municipal issues, elected by the Australian
citizens of Norfolk Island. Further, Norfolk Islanders who are
Australian citizens will retain the right to vote in Commonwealth
elections (the Commonwealth government will be responsible for
certain aspects of the governance of Norfolk Island, through the
application of Commonwealth laws including those relating to
taxation, social security, the provision of health care, immigration,
and through the administration of New South Wales laws as applied to
Norfolk Island). This model is consistent with arrangements in
Australia‘s other inhabited external territories such as Christmas
Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands.
The
final governance arrangements proposed for Norfolk Island are thus
consistent with Art 25(a) and (b), although the model for achieving
this right is different to that currently in place on Norfolk Island.
During
the interim transition time, the ability of individuals on Norfolk
Island to participate in the conduct of public affairs at the local
level will be more limited due to a lack of a democratically elected
mechanism at the local level during this period. The transition from
one governance model to another is a complicated process, which must
be undertaken in a careful and considered manner to avoid unintended
negative impacts on the community affected. The interim transition
time from the current governance model, which has proved
itself
over a number of years to be financially unsustainable and not to be
serving the needs of the Norfolk Island community, to the new
governance model is designed to avoid such negative impacts and give
the necessary time to put the new governance model in place, while
taking immediate action to redress Norfolk Island‘s depressed
economy and the poor condition of its essential services. The present
Norfolk Island Government has effectively been insolvent for a number
of years and has been unable to deliver an appropriate level of
services.
The
short term limitation on local democratic representation is a
reasonable, necessary and proportionate measure in light of the
pressing need to address the numerous problems facing the Norfolk
Island community. The creation of an Advisory Council of local
community representatives will minimise the impact of the absence of
local democratic representation for this interim period, which is
expected to be less than 2 years. Participation in an advisory
council is a recognised form of participation in the conduct of
public affairs (see General Comment No 25 at para 6). Australian
Citizens will still be able to vote in Federal elections and express
their views to the responsible Commonwealth Minister, the
Administrator on Norfolk Island or the Executive Director. Community
members may also engage with elected representatives in the Federal
Parliament.
The
right to freedom of movement
Article
12(1) of the ICCPR provide that everyone lawfully within the
territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to
liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence. A similar
right is found in Art 10 of the Convention
on the Rights of the Child (CRC),
Art 18 of the CRPD, Art 5 of the CERD and Art 15 of CEDAW.
Norfolk
Island is the only inhabited territory of Australia to which the
Migration
Act 1958 does
not extend. This Bill proposes to extend the application of the
Migration
Act 1958 and
the Immigration
(Guardianship of Children) Act 1946 to
Norfolk Island, which will overtake the Immigration
Act 1980 (NI)
in providing for migration related matters. This promotes the right
to freedom of movement of Australians by reducing barriers to
movement, including removing the need for Australians not resident on
Norfolk Island to carry passports for travel to Norfolk Island (which
is internal travel within Australia) and the removal of residency
fees for those who wish to reside permanently on Norfolk Island.
The
right to social security
Article
9 of ICESCR recognises the right of everyone to social security,
including social insurance. A similar right is found in Art 26 of the
CRC and Art 28 of the CRPD. Under Art 2(1) of ICESCR, a country is
obliged to take steps 'to the maximum of its available resources,
with a view to achieving progressively the full realisation' of the
rights recognised in ICESCR.
Extension
of the mainland social security systems, including superannuation,
payments and services available to other Australians living in
Australia promotes Norfolk Island residents‘ right to social
security. The mainland social security system is manifestly more
comprehensive than the Norfolk Island Government‘s own welfare
system, which does not provide any family assistance, childcare or
unemployment payments.
The
right to health
Article
12 of ICESCR recognises the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the
highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. A similar
right is found in Art 24 of the CRC and Art 25 of the CRPD. Under Art
2(1) of ICESCR, a country is obliged to take steps 'to the maximum of
its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the
full 13
realisation'
of the rights recognised in ICESCR. Ensuring that health services are
affordable is one component of this right.
The
extension of the Medicare Benefits Schedule and the Pharmaceutical
Benefits Scheme will promote the right to health of Australian
citizens on Norfolk Island. The pre-existing Norfolk Island health
scheme only subsidises expenses beyond a threshold, whereas Medicare
and the PBS begin providing assistance immediately. This will improve
the access of citizens, and particularly low income earners, to
healthcare on the Island.
The
right to an adequate standard of living
Article
11(1) of ICESCR recognises the right of everyone to an adequate
standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate
food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of
living conditions. A similar right is found in Art 27 of the CRC and
Art 28 of the CRPD. Under Art 2(1) of ICESCR, a country is obliged to
take steps 'to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to
achieving progressively the full realisation' of the rights
recognised in ICESCR.
The
primary objective of the governance reforms and extension of mainland
social security, health and other arrangements to Norfolk Island is
to address the effective insolvency of the current Norfolk Island
Government and its inability to deliver an appropriate level of basic
services to the Norfolk Island Community. Further, the governance
reforms will allow investments to be made to revitalise Norfolk
Island‘s depressed economy. All of these steps will assist in
improving the standard of living on Norfolk Island.
The
right to work
Article
6(1) of ICESCR recognises the right to work, which includes the right
of everyone to the opportunity to gain his living by work which he
freely chooses or accepts. Under this Article, State Parties
undertake to take appropriate steps to safeguard this right. A
similar right is found in Art 27 of the CRPD. Under Art 2(1) of
ICESCR, a country is obliged to take steps 'to the maximum of its
available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full
realisation' of the rights recognised in ICESCR.
Steps
that State Parties take to achieve the full realisation of the right
to work must include policies and techniques to achieve steady
economic, social and cultural development (see Art 6(2)). As noted
above, one of the primary aims of the reforms set out in the Norfolk
Island Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 and related Bills is to
revitalise the Norfolk Island economy, which in turn should lead to
the creation of more jobs on Norfolk Island hence facilitating the
realisation of the right to work for Norfolk Island residents.
Conclusion
The
Bill is compatible with human rights because it advances the
protection of human rights. To the extent that it may limit human
rights, those limitations are reasonable, necessary and
proportionate.
Assistant
Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, the Hon Jamie
Briggs MP
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home